Christopher Schroeder

Category: community and culture

  • So Long Sun-Times

    So Long Sun-Times

    I’ve discontinued my Chicago Sun-Times subscription, and am disappointed about doing so.

    The final factor was its required “Premium Edition” fee, which for those who had this fee waived is in fact a price increase. These editions are generally useless cash-grabs, and sometimes filled with AI hallucinations. Moreover, this fee is still not required by its cross-town competitor.

    I had switched my daily delivery subscription to the Sun-Times after it was acquired by Chicago Public Media. Since then, I’ve observed a reduction in its quality, such as fewer op-eds and less unique content, that only increases its contrast with its hedge-fund-owned rival.

    I’ve also asked for clarification of inconsistent and inaccurate price-increase processes, missed delivery promises, and subscriber-supporter differences, which are often unclear or even ignored. These issues become even more confusing given that the print newspaper is freely available in .pdf on its website.

    These observations and others, such as the increased content overlap between the Sun-Times and WBEZ or increased sponsor spots on the radio after the predictable federal funding loss, have initiated a seeming commercialized convergence, and produced a cross-platform credibility problem. The limited responses to my often ignored queries from a long-time donor have been less than reassuring.

    I realize that these conditions are part of larger concerns, such as a widespread performative progressivism. Regardless, I think these challenge the primary public media purpose, and its promise of facts and reason for its communities.

    I wonder in other words whether Chicago Public Media is the innovative institution that it describes itself as, and that I’ve long imagined it to be.

    I know that it will continue despite decreases in my modest financial support. I just hope that its leaders can restore my confidence in it as a crucial contributor to an informed Chicago and a functional American democracy.

    Such beliefs are perhaps more important now when hope for our future is harder to find.

  • For All

    For All

    I was intrigued by a recent biographical account of John Mark Comer, who for some is the current “personal-spirituality guy” with a large social media following.

    The article offers background about Comer, contextualizes his efforts, and shares professional and personal experiences. In doing so, it seems to be introducing Comer, and explaining his approach and influence, to those who readers who like I hadn’t heard of him.

    One of Comer’s central belief is that technology is negatively affecting its users’ spirituality. In contrast, he advocates for an approach that he calls “spiritual archaeology,” or excavating Christian practices from its history, and argues for organizing adherents’ lives around their founder’s habits, which he identifies as scripture, service, the Sabbath, solitude, fasting, prayer, witnessing, generosity, and community.

    Comer’s appeal, which seems too progressive to conservatives and too conservative to progressives, has been criticized as too narrowly focused. Nonetheless, it appeals to the author of this account, who reports her realization in conversation with Comer that she — late twenties, college-educated, city-living — is his target demographic and confesses her struggle like Comer’s has with these recommendations.

    I wonder whether such practices might increasingly appeal to others, and know that Christianity isn’t the only justification for these. I believe that these practices could appeal to anyone who prefers less revelation and more reason regardless of their religious persuasion if any at all.

    I wonder whether this author is offering her experience as an assessment although it would fall short of anything reliable (n = 1). I wish she would have envisioned a larger audience for her account.

    Others (Doucleff 2026, e.g.) attest to the need for a more values-driving life and offer such practices along with research studies and other reasons as responses to technology-dominated lives. An additional advantage would be reducing the allure of spiritual or moral superiority, which could be more compassionate and more appealing.

    Christians in other words aren’t the only ones who use digital technologies and suffer from spiritual malaise. All of us could benefit from greater community and more solitude, and even from studying canonical texts for example and serving others more.

    Surely any informed account of the foundational Christian figure would approve.

  • More From Moore

    More From Moore

    I can appreciate that Natalie Moore was able to watch both Prada movies with her mother but question the relevance of her most recent column.

    The sequel might have coincided as Moore suggests with a new Media Insight Project report, but it offers less about the future of media in the United States than she suggests. Rather, the movie relegates journalism, “Capital J” or not, to the setting for a continuing story that was started in the first movie.

    Corporate raiders might appear in the second to dismantle legacy publications, but the “page views” emphasis for example predates Andy’s return as the new features editor. Rather, the movie focuses primarily upon the relationship between Andy, who in her time away has become an award-winning journalist, and her former and future boss Miranda.

    This relationship, which occupies the center of this story, says more about time and aging, and the effects of these upon working relationships among women. Andy, who now trusts learned her instincts and advocates for herself, discovers that the world could be less vicious than she otherwise believed. Miranda in turn finds in Andy a former and perhaps future version of herself, someone who if they can collaborate will enhance both Miranda’s legacy and her life.

    This focus is not only established by the new working relationship between Andy and Miranda, but it is reinforced by the newfound friendship between Andy and her erstwhile rival Emily. Emily, who is working for Dior at the start of the movie, agrees to use her boyfriend Benji to buy the company and unbeknownst to Andy to install her in Miranda’s position, which Andy and Miranda subsequently prevent by finding yet another buyer, which nonetheless doesn’t prevent Andy and Emily from becoming friends.

    In this and other ways, this sequel is more about corporate relationships than the future of journalism, which makes this op-ed seem more like a vanity opportunity that allows Moore to reminisce about her mother and her career without offering much of substance to readers. This condition becomes even clearer in contrast with the only other op-ed in that Sunday newspaper.

    That reveals a larger concern, one that is actually about the future of journalism in Chicago. The Sun-Times seems to have generally reduced its op-eds, and some days offers none to its readers. Such circumstances can only increase the pressure for more from Moore, and from her editors and publisher.